SUBMITTED TO PROF.

FAIZAN SIR

sandeep chawda
BALLB (HONS.) REGULAR 4TH YEAR

AN ASSIGNMENT
ON “ELECTION
COMMISSION
ELECTION LAW
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success and final outcome of this assignment required a lot of guidance and assistance from
many people and I am extremely privileged to have got this all along the completion of my
assignment. All that I have done is only due to such supervision and assistance and I would not
forget to thank them.
We respect and thank Prof. FAIZAN SIR for providing me an opportunity to do the project work
on the topic “ELECTION COMMISSION” in Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia and giving
me all support and guidance which made me complete the project duly. I am extremely grateful
to her. I’d also like to thank my parents and sister for being so supportive and cooperating with
me during the making of this assignment
SANDEEP CHAWDA

1|P a ge
Contents
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Election Machinery .................................................................................................................................. 6
Functions of The Election Commission ..................................................................................................... 7
Electoral Reforms In India:..................................................................................................................... 12
Proactive Role Of Election Commission.................................................................................................. 12
Model Code of Conduct ......................................................................................................................... 13
Registration of Political Parties .............................................................................................................. 15
Checking Criminalization of Politics........................................................................................................ 15
Conclusion............................................................................................................................................. 17
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................................... 18

2|P a ge
INTRODUCTION
The Constitution of India ushered in a democratic republic for the free people of the country. The
founding fathers of the Constitution took solemn care to devote a special chapter to elections
niched safely in Part XV of the Constitution. The draft of Art 289 of the Constitution of India
(which on adoption later became the present Art 324 in Part XV of the Constitution) was
introduced in the Constituent Assembly on 15 ]une 1949 by Dr BR Ambedkar, Chairman of the
Drafting Committee of the Constituent Assembly and one of the chief architects of the Indian
Constitution.

Part Xv Of The Constitution Of India

Article 324. Superintendence , direction, and control of elections to be vested in an Election
Commission.

(1) The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and
the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to
the offices of President and Vice-President held under this Constitution[1] [***] shall be vested
in a Commission (referred to in this Constitution as the Election Commission).

(2) The Election Commission shall consist of the Chief Election Commissioner and such number
of other Election Commissioners, if any, as the President may from time to time fix and the
appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners shall,
subject to the provisions of any law made in that behalf by Parliament, be made by the President.

(3) When any other Election Commissioner is so appointed the Chief Election Commissioner
shall act as the Chairman of the Election Commission.

(4) Before each general election to the House of the People and to the Legislative Assembly of
each State, and before the first general election and thereafter before each biennial election to the
Legislative Council of each State having such Council, the President may also appoint after
consultation with the Election Commission such Regional Commissioners as he may consider

3|P a ge
necessary to assist the Election Commission in the performance of the functions conferred on the
Commission by clause (1).

(5) Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, the conditions of service and tenure
of office of the Election Commissioners and the Regional Commissioners shall be such as the
President may by rule determine:

Provided that the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in
like manner and on the like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court and the conditions of
service of the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his
appointment:

Provided further that any other Election Commissioner or a Regional Commissioner shall not be
removed from office except on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner.

(6) The President, or the Governor[2] [***] of a State, shall, when so requested by the Election
Commission, make available to the Election Commission or to a Regional Commissioner such
staff as may be necessary for the discharge of the functions conferred on the Election
Commission by clause (1). [3]

The Supreme Court in TN Seshan v Union of India and Ors[4] observed that :
Democracy being the basic feature of our constitutional set up, there can be no two opinions that
free and fair elections to our legislative bodies alone would guarantee the growth of a healthy
democracy in the country. ln order to ensure the purity of the election process, it was thought by
our Constitution-makers that the responsibility to hold free and fair election in the country should
be entrusted to an independent body which would be insulated from political and/ or executive
interference. It is inherent in a democratic set up that the agency which is entrusted the task of
holding elections to the legislatures should be fully insulated so that it can function as an
independent agency free from external pressures from the party in power or executive of the day.
This objective is achieved by the setting up of an Election Commission, a permanent body, under
Art 324(1) of the constitution.

4|P a ge
The Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir also reposed faith in the Election
Commission, created as aforesaid under Art 324 of the Constitution of India, and entrusted the
task of holding elections to the State Legislature of Jammu and Kashmir to the same
Commission, instead of creating a separate State commission which it could do under its own
constitution (s 158 of the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution).

Structure Of The Election Commission

The commission presently consists of a Chief Election Commissioner and two Election
Commissioners, appointed by the president.

Until October 1989, there was just one Chief Election Commissioner. In 1989, two Election
Commissioners were appointed, but were removed again in January 1990. In 1991, however, the
Parliament of India passed a law providing for the appointment of two Election Commissioners.
This law was amended and renamed in 1993 as the Chief Election Commissioner and other
Election Commissioners (Conditions of Service) Amendment Act 1993
The Constitution does not prescribe any qualifications, academic or otherwise, for appointment
to these offices. However, by convention, only senior civil servants, either serving or retired, of
the rank of the cabinet secretary or secretary to the Government of India or of an equivalent rank
have been appointed as the Chief Election Commissioner and election commissioners so far.

The Chief Election Commissioner may be removed from his office in like manner and on the like
grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court. It means the Chief Election Commissioner may be
removed from office by Parliament by passing a resolution to that effect, passed by special
majority on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity. The Election Commission shall
consist of a chief Election Commissioner and such other Commissioners as the President may,
from time to time, fix. Other Election Commissioner may be removed by the President on the
recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner. Salary of chief election commissioner is
same as justice of Supreme Court of India. All three commissioners have same right of taking a
decision. Tenure of commissioners is 6 years or up to age of 65, whichever is earlier. The

5|P a ge
Election Commission of India has completed more than 300 elections. The Chief Election
Commissioner can be removed from office only on the like manner and on like grounds as a
judge of Supreme Court.

Election Machinery
The Commission has a separate Secretariat at New Delhi, consisting of about 300 officials, in a
hierarchical set up. Two Deputy Election Commissioners who are the senior most officers in the
Secretariat assist the Commission. They are generally appointed from the national civil service of
the country and are selected and appointed by the Commission with tenure. Directors, Principal
Secretaries, and Secretaries, Under Secretaries and Deputy Directors support the Deputy Election
Commissioners in turn. There is functional and territorial distribution of work in the
Commission. The work is organised in Divisions, Branches and sections; each of the last
mentioned units is in charge of a Section Officer. The main functional divisions are Planning,
Judicial, Administration, Information Systems, Media and Secretariat Co-ordination.

The territorial work is distributed among separate units responsible for different Zones into
which the 35 constituent States and Union Territories of the country are grouped for convenience
of management. At the State level, the election work is supervised, subject to overall
superintendence, direction and control of the Commission, by the Chief Electoral Officer of the
State, who is appointed by the Commission from amongst senior civil servants proposed by the
concerned State government.

He is, in most of the States, a full time officer and has a team of supporting staff. At the district
and constituency levels, the District Election Officers, Electoral Registration Officers and
Returning Officers, who are assisted by a large number of junior functionaries, perform election
work. They all perform their functions relating to elections in addition to their other
responsibilities. During election time, however, they are available to the Commission, more or
less, on a full time basis. The gigantic task force for conducting a countrywide general election
consists of nearly five million polling personnel and civil police forces. This huge election
machinery is deemed to be on deputation to the Election Commission and is subject to its
control, superintendence and discipline during the election period, extending over a period of one

6|P a ge
and half to two months.

Administrative Expenditure of the Election Commission

The Administrative expenditure of the Election Commission is not a ‘charge’ on the
Consolidated Fund of India, and is a voted expenditure. The Commission has proposed to the
government that its administrative expenditure should also be a `charge’ on the Consolidated
Fund of India, like the expenditure of some other constitutional authorities, namely the Union
Public Service Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor- General of India. This proposal
did not find favour with the Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms in 1990. However, the
government subsequently accepted the Commission’s proposal and introduced a Bill titled the
Election Commission (Charging of Expenses on the Consolidated Fund of India) Bill 1994, in
the House of the People, but it lapsed without being passed on the dissolution of that House in
1996. Thus, the expenditure of the Commission continues to be voted by Parliament, despite the
reiteration of its proposal by the Election Commission from time to time and in its latest
proposals in July 2004.

Functions of The Election Commission

The primary function of the Election Commission entrusted to it by the Constitution is the
superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral tolls for, and conduct of
elections, to Parliament and to the legislature of every State, and also of elections to the offices
of the President and Vice-President of India [Art 324(1)]. Originally, the Constitution also vested
in the Election Commission the responsibility of appointment of election tribunals for the
decision of doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with elections to Parliament and
to the legislatures of the States [Art 324(1), as originally enacted].

However, on the recommendation of the Election Commission in its Report on the third general
elections held in 1962, the trial of election petitions was entrusted to the High court’s and the
institution of election tribunals was abolished, as the experience showed that the disposal of
election petitions was getting inordinately delayed because even the interlocutory orders of the
tribunals were subject to appeal to the High Courts. Accordingly, Art 324(1) was amended by the
7|P a ge
Constitution (Nineteenth Amendment) Act 1966, to relieve the Commission of the Function of
appointing election tribunals.

Summing up the amplitude of powers of the Election Commission under Art 324, the Supreme
Court held in Union of India v association for Democratic Reforms and Ors[16].

(1) The jurisdiction of the Election Commission is wide enough to include all powers necessary
for smooth conduct of elections and the word ‘elections’ is used in a wide sense to include the
entire process of election which consists of several stages and embraces many steps.

(2) The limitation on plenary character of power is when the Parliament or State Legislature has
made a valid law relating to or in connection with elections, the Commission is required to act in
conformity with the said provisions. In case where law is silent, art 324 is a reservoir of power to
act for the avowed purpose of having free and fair election. Constitution has taken care of
leaving scope for exercise of residuary power by the Commission in its own right as a creature of
the Constitution in the infinite variety of situations that may emerge from time to time in a large
democracy as every contingency could not be foreseen or anticipated by the enacted laws or the
rules. By issuing necessary direction, Commission can fill the vacuum till there is legislation on
the subject. In Kanhiya Lal Omar’s case[17], the Court construed the expressions
‘superintendence, direction and control` in Art 324 (1) and held that a direction may mean an
order issued to a particular individual or a precept which may have to follow and it may be a
specific or a general order and such phrase should be construed liberally empowering the
election commission to issue such orders.

Other Important Functions Of The Election Commission Under The Constitution Of India
Apart from the above primary function, the Constitution has also entrusted the Election
Commission with another important duty of advising the President and the governors in the
matter of disqualification of sitting members of Parliament and of State legislatures, on all
grounds other than the ground of defection (Arts 103 and 192). If any question arises whether
any sitting member of Parliament or of a State legislature has become subject to any
disqualification for continuing as such member under the Constitution (other than on the ground

8|P a ge
of defection) or under any law, such question is decided by the President, in the case of a
member of Parliament, and by the governor, in the case of a member of State legislature [Arts
103(l) and 192(1)].

Other Functions Of Election Commission Under The Law

The Election Commission has also been vested with another advisory jurisdiction under the law.
If a person is found guilty of a corrupt practice at an election either by a high court in an election
petition or by the Supreme Court in an election appeal, the President decides the question
whether such person should be disqualified for contesting future elections and, if so, for what
period [Section 8A(1), 1951 Act]. Before deciding such question, the President obtains the
opinion of the Election Commission and acts according to such opinion, as in the case of the
post-election ‘ disqualification of sitting members of Parliament [S. 8A(3) ]. Thus, though the
order is issued by the President, it is in fact the Election Commission which decides the basic
issue of disqualification in such matters. _ The maximum period for which the disqualification
can be imposed in such cases is six years from the date the order of the high court or, as the tense
may he, of the Supreme Court takes effect [proviso to s 8A(1)].

`Here, it deserves to be noted that it is the President who decides the question of disqualification
of all persons found guilty of corrupt practices, irrespective of whether the election pertained to
Parliament or to a State legislature.3l Prior to 1975, a person found guilty of a corrupt practice at
an election was automatically disqualified for a period of six years from the date the order of the
Supreme Court or the high court finding him guilty took effect. However, the law was amended
by the Election Laws (Amendment) Act 1975, to provide that there shall be no automatic
disqualification in such cases, and the question and the period of disqualification shall be decided
by the President on the basis of the opinion of the Election Commission. It was provided that the
case of every such person found guilty of a corrupt practice would be referred to the President by
such authority as may be specified by the Central Government, and that the President shall
thereupon refer the matter to the Election Commission for its opinion. Pursuant thereto, the
Central Government has specified the Secretary General of the House of the People or the
Secretary General of the Council of States as such referring authority, if the election at which the
person concerned has been found guilty related to the House of the People or, as the case may be,

9|P a ge
to the Council of States. Likewise, in the case of a person found guilty at an election to the
legislative assembly or the legislative council of a State, the specified authority is the Secretary
of the House concerned. It has, however, been observed that there is always a time lag between
the date on which the order of the high court or the Supreme Court takes effect, the date on
which the matter is referred by the aforesaid specified authority to the President, and the ultimate
date on which the President decides the question on the opinion of the Election Commission.
During this intervening period, the person concerned cannot be said to be disqualified under the
law, as the disqualification will be visited upon the person concerned only when the President
decides the question. In one case relating to the Bihar legislative assembly, the reference from
the Secretary to the Bihar legislative assembly was itself made to the President after nearly five
years from the date of the order of the Supreme Court, finding a member of that assembly guilty
of corrupt practice. As a result, the person concerned suffered disqualification for less than a
year. The Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms recommended in its report in May 1990,
that the law may be amended to restore the position as obtaining before 1975 providing for
automatic disqualification of the person concerned for a period of six years from the date of the
order of the court. The Election Commission has, however, expressed the view that the period of
disqualification should be commensurate with the gravity of corrupt practice committed and,
therefore, there should not be automatic disqualification for six years in all cases. Under the
existing law, the Commission tenders its opinion to the President after hearing the person
concerned in regard to the tvvo-fold question, whether, first, he should be disqualified at all and,
if so, for what period.

Quasi Judicial Functions Of The Election Commission

Apart from the above advisory jurisdiction, the Election Commission has another important
function to perform under the law. All associations or bodies of individual citizens calling
themselves as political parties and wishing to contest elections under the name and banner of a
political party have to get themselves registered with the Election Commission (s 29A, 1951
Act). Such function of registration of political parties by the Election Commission has been held
by the Supreme Court to be a quasi-judicial function of the Commission[25].

Such registered political parties, if they fulfill certain criteria fixed by the Election Commission

10 | P a g e
on the basis of their poll performance, are further recognised by the Commission either as
national or State parties, under the provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and
Allotment) Order 1968, promulgated by the Commission. If any split takes place in any such
recognised national or State party and there are two or more rival or splinter groups of the party
each claiming to be that party, it is the Election Commission which decides under para 15 of the
Symbols Order as to which of these rival or splinter groups is the party

Again, if any of such recognised national or State parties merge with other parties, whether
recognised or unrecognised, it is the Election Commission which determines whether there has
been a valid merger of such parties, and whether on such merger, the parties so merging should
be recognised as national or State parties and which election symbols should be reserved for
them. The Supreme Court has held that while deciding such disputes, the Election Commission
exercises the judicial power of State and is deemed to be a quasi-judicial tribunal against whose
decision an appeal shall straightway lie to the Supreme Court under its appellate jurisdiction
under Art 136.

Judicial Review
The decisions of the Commission can be challenged in the High Court and the Supreme Court of
the India by appropriate petitions. By long standing convention and several judicial
pronouncements, once the actual process of elections has started, the judiciary does not intervene
in the actual conduct of the polls. Once the polls are completed and result declared, the
Commission cannot review any result on its own. This can only be reviewed through the process
of an election petition, which can be filed before the High Court, in respect of elections to the
Parliament and State Legislatures. In respect of elections for the offices of the President and Vice
President, such petitions can only be filed before the Supreme Court.
The Election Commission of India is now a day missing both of mandatory elements in its
actions and mind. The commission has been divided into political blocks.

11 | P a g e
Electoral Reforms In India:

Proactive Role Of Election Commission

One of the most important features of a democratic polity is elections at regular intervals.
Elections constitute the signpost of democracy. These are the medium through which the
attitudes, values and beliefs of the people towards their political environment are reflected.
Elections grant people a government and the government has constitutional right to govern those
who elect it. Elections are the central democratic procedure for selecting and controlling leaders.
Elections provide an opportunity to the people to express their faith in the government from time
to time and change it when the need arises. Elections symbolize the sovereignty of the people
and provide legitimacy to the authority of the government. Thus, free and fair elections are
indispensable for the success of democracy.

In continuance of the British legacy, India has opted for parliamentary democracy. Since 1952,
the country has witnessed elections to the legislative bodies at both the national as well as State
levels. The electoral system in India is hamstrung by so many snags and stultifying factors. Such
maladies encourage the anti-social elements to jump into the electoral fray. Our system was
largely free from any major flaw till the fourth general elections (1967). The distortions in its
working appeared, for the first time, in the fifth general elections (1971) and these got multiplied
in the successive elections, especially in those held in the eighties and thereafter. [Dash 2006:
50] Many a time, the Election commission has expressed its concern and anxiety for removing
obstacles in the way of free and fair polls. It has had made a number of recommendations and
repeatedly reminded the government the necessity of changing the existing laws to check the
electoral malpractices. The Tarkunde Committee Report of 1975, the Goswami Committee
Report of 1990, the Election commission’s recommendations in 1998 and the Indrajit Gupta
Committee Report of 1998 produced a comprehensive set of proposals regarding electoral
reforms. A number of new initiatives have been taken by the Election commission to cleanse the
electoral process in India. The important among these are being discussed here.

12 | P a g e
Model Code of Conduct
The Election Commission of India is regarded as guardian of free and fair elections. In every
elections, the EC issues a Model Code of Conduct for political parties and candidates to conduct
elections in a free and fair manner. The Commission circulated its first Code at the time of the
fifth general elections, held in 1971. Since then, the Code has been revised from time to time.
The Code of Conduct lays down guidelines as to how political parties and candidates should
conduct themselves during elections.

A provision was made under the Code that from the time the elections are announced by the
Commission, Ministers and other authorities cannot announce any financial grant, lay foundation
stones of projects of schemes of any kind, make promises of construction of roads, carry out any
appointments in government and public undertakings which may have the effect of influencing
the voters in favour of the ruling party.

The misuse of official machinery takes different forms, such as issue of advertisements at the
cost of public exchequer, misuse of official mass media during election period for partisan
coverage of political news and publicity regarding their achievements, misuse of government
transport including aircraft/helicopter, vehicles. For example, during the 2003 Himachal Pradesh
Assembly elections, the Commission had issued strict instructions to the political parties to
abstain from the use of plastic and polythene for the preparation of posters and publicity
material.

But the political parties, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party, put
up a large number of saffron and green publicity flags made of polythene. [The Tribune: 2003]
During the 2002 Punjab Assembly elections, an aggressive advertisement campaign was
launched by the Congress against Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal and his son, accusing
them of corruption and bartering away the interests of Punjab.

The Akali Dal hit back with its own set of equally aggressive advertisements against the
Congress leaders. [Prashar: 2002] The Election commission of India had to intervene to clarify
that under the Model Code of Conduct, personal allegations against individual leaders were not

13 | P a g e
allowed, though criticisms of policy decisions and performance were permitted. Similarly, the
EC also held Narendra Modi and Sonia Gandhi responsible for violation of the Model Code of
Conduct by making controversial remarks during elections campaign in the 2007 Gujarat
Assembly polls. The EC expressed its severe displeasure over its violation by the two leaders and
expected that both of them in future would adhere to the salutary provisions of the Code in letter
and spirit. [The Financial Express: 2007] Despite sincere efforts on the part of the EC to check
malpractices, in each and every elections India witnesses violation of the Model Code of
Conduct.

In June 2002, the EC on the direction of the Supreme Court, issued an order under Article 324
that each candidate must submit an affidavit regarding the information of his/her criminal
antecedents; assets (both movable and immovable) of self and those of spouses and dependents
as well; and qualifications at the time of filing his/her nomination papers for elections to the Lok
Sabha, the Rajya Sabha and the State Legislative Assemblies.

But political parties believed that the Election commission and the judiciary were overstepping
their powers. At the all-party meeting, held on July 8, 2002, representatives of 21 political parties
decided that the Election commission’s order should not be allowed to be implemented. The
Supreme Court again came out as a guardian of the citizen’s right to information.

The Apex Court gave its judgment on March 13, 2003, basically asserting its previous June 2002
decision, which required full disclosure by all candidates. The order made it clear that failing to
furnish the relevant affidavit shall be considered as a violation of the Supreme Court’s order and
as such the nomination papers shall be liable to be rejected by the Returning Officer. Furnishing
of wrong or incomplete information shall result in the rejection of nomination papers, apart from
inviting penal consequences under the Indian Penal Code. The 2004 General Elections were
conducted under these rules.

The above order is an effective step to make democracy healthy and unpolluted. Citizens have
every right to know about the persons whom they prefer as their representatives. The EC has

14 | P a g e
directed all Returning Officers to display the copies of nomination papers and affidavits filed by
candidates to the general public and representatives of print and electronic media, free of cost.

Registration of Political Parties

The party system is an essential feature of parliamentary democracy. However, there is no direct
reference of political parties in the Constitution of India. The statutory law relating to registration
of political parties was enacted in 1989 which was quite liberal. As a result, a large number of
non-serious parties mushroomed and got registered with the Commission. Many of them did not
contest elections at all after their registration. It led to confusion among electors as to whom to
vote.

To eliminate the mushrooming of parties, the EC had to take some rigorous steps. The
Commission now registers a party which has at least 100 registered electors as its members and
is also charging a nominal processing fee of Rs 10,000 to cover the administration expenses
which it will have to incur on correspondence with the parties after their registration.[30]
In order to ensure that the registered political parties practice democracy in their internal
functioning, the Commission requires them to hold their organizational elections regularly in
accordance with their constitutions. The measures taken by the Election commission to
streamline the registration of political parties have shown effective results. These have lessened
the headache of the administrative machinery, as well as confusion of the electorate.

Checking Criminalization of Politics

Criminalization of politics is a grave problem in India. This menace began in Bihar and gradually
spread to every nook and corner of the nation. In 2003, a law was introduced to prohibit the
election of criminals to the legislative bodies. However, persons with criminal background
continue to hold seats in Parliament and State Assemblies. This leads to a very undesirable and
embarrassing situation when law-breakers become law-makers and move around under police
protection. During the 13th Lok Sabha elections candidates having criminal cases against them
numbered 12 in Bihar and 17 in Uttar Pradesh. It has been rightly observed by J.P.Naik: “Power
is the spoiler of men and it is more so in a country like India, where the hungry stomachs
produce power hungry politicians.”
15 | P a g e
The EC has expressed its serious concern over the entry of anti-social and criminal persons into
the electoral arena. From time to time, it has set down norms and made recommendations to the
government to curb the menace of criminalization of politics. The Commission has urged all
political parties to reach a consensus that no person with a criminal background will be given the
party ticket.

The candidates to elections are also obliged to submit an affidavit in a prescribed form declaring
their criminal records, including convictions, charges pending and cases initiated against them.
The information so furnished by the candidates shall be disseminated to the public, and to the
print and electronic media.

Limits on Poll Expenses

To get rid of the growing influence and vulgar show of money during elections, the EC has made
many suggestions in this regard. The Commission has fixed legal limits on the amount of money
which a candidate can spend during the elections campaign. These limits have been revised from
time to time. During 2004 elections, the ceiling limits for Lok Sabha seats varied between Rs 10,
00,000 to Rs 25, 00,000. For Assembly seats, the highest limit was Rs 10, 00,000 and the lowest
limit was Rs 5, 00,000. The EC, by appointing expenditure observers keeps an eye on the
individual accounts of election expenditure made by a candidate during election campaign. The
contestants are also required to give details of expenditure within 30 days of the declaration of
the election results. However, political parties do not adhere to the financial Lakashman Rekha
(limits) as huge amounts are spent by parties under the garb of their supporters.[31]
Apart from this, the EC is also in favour of holding the Lok Sabha and the Assembly elections
simultaneously, and to reduce the campaign period from 21 to 14 days. This, they feel, will lead
to trim down the election expenditure. The Election commission’s attempt to impose these
measures has been a move in the right direction.

16 | P a g e
Conclusion
Over the years, the Election Commission has conducted a number of laudable electoral reforms
to strengthen democracy and enhance the fairness of elections. These reforms are quite adequate
and admirable. Undoubtedly, the election machinery, under the aegis of the EC, deserves credit
for conducting elections in a free and fair manner. However, our system is still plagued by many
vices. To win votes, political parties resort to foul methods and corrupt practices. Such maladies
encourage the anti-social elements to enter the electoral fray. The problem is not lack of laws,
but lack of their strict implementation. In order to stamp out these unfair tendencies, there is a
need to strengthen the hands of the EC and to give it more legal and institutional powers. The EC
must be entrusted with powers to punish the errant politicians who transgress and violate the
electoral laws.

Our election commission tries its best to weed out the virus of malpractices. It is optimistic of
strengthening and improving the working of democracy through free and fair elections. It has
always devised better systems and is using advanced scientific technologies for maintaining the
high reputation of the Indian elections. However, the success of reforms will largely depend
upon the will of the political parties to adhere to and implement such reforms. An independent
media and an enlightened public opinion have no substitute in pushing through reforms. If
people vote according to their convictions and punish those who infract the rules, corrupt
practices will automatically disappear. And this will go a long way towards enabling democracy
to flourish and grow to its full capacity.

The Commission has taken several new initiatives in the recent past. Notable among these are, a
scheme for use of State owned Electronic Media for broadcast/telecast by Political parties,
checking criminalization of politics, computerization of electoral rolls, providing electors with
Identity Cards, simplifying the procedure for maintenance of accounts and filling of the same by
candidates and a variety of measures for strict compliance of Model Code of Conduct, for
providing a level playing field to contestants during the elections.

17 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
WEBSITES:

1- www.indiankanoon.com
2- www.livelaw.com
3- www.scconline.com
4- www.manupatra.com

BOOKS REFFERED:

1-ATUL KOHLI : the success of india’s democracy

2-B. C. CHOWDHURY

18 | P a g e